Enforcing gun laws a felony
I’m with Joe: nice sentiment. But limited practical value. Even if it passed, it wouldn’t stand up to any sort of court review.
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
January 3rd, 2010 at 11:29 am
Why?
Simply a “the law is above the law” kind of thing?
January 3rd, 2010 at 1:04 pm
Supremacy Clause.
January 3rd, 2010 at 5:48 pm
IOW, yes, it is “law is above the law” kidn of thing, if the first “law” refers to federal law and the second to state. An invalid federal law is no law at all, whether a conflicting state law exists or not. It if the federal law is valid, it will trump any inconsistent state law every time.
January 3rd, 2010 at 9:28 pm
Yes, Supremacy Clause. No matter what Heinlein wrote, you cannot shoot “revenuers” for trespassing, and you cannot prosecute a federal agent for shooting a moonshiner, in the course of his duties, in state court.
January 3rd, 2010 at 11:02 pm
It’ll be struck down, but that’s the point. It’s to force the government to publicly prevent a state from regulating its own guns. Makes the feds look like bullies.
January 4th, 2010 at 3:57 am
Actually, you can shoot them, you just can’t get their permission to do so. Big fucking surprise! Duh!
Immunity from prosecution does not grant immunity from the laws of physics.
This raises the spectre of that,and may just be a dissuading factor in the feds bullying. We, the average citizen, certainly won’t be any worse off for it.
January 4th, 2010 at 11:07 am
Ok, thanks for the info!